BRENT in 10-uh-C
Well-known member
Well, this is yet another mystery (-and likely yet another misprint) in the Service Bulletin info.
My Ford engineering print is dated 10/07/31 and does not signify the use of the AA marking on the Foot, -and the length measurement on my print (38¾") is a different dimensional number than the number (34⅜") listed in the Service Bulletins. (That's a pretty significant discrepancy!
)Adding to the confusion, on my copy of the print it specifies an AA-3412-B Foot to be used, ....however if you look at the 'AA-3412' predecessors that were designed, you will see that the AA-3412-A design was introduced in 10/01/29 however almost immediately obsoleted on 11/2/29. The prior part number for the Foot was an AA-3412 which on November 02 of 1929 was changed to AA-3412-AR.
Since this "change" was printed in the November 1929 copy of the S/B, my initial guess is someone 'jumped the gun' on printing that on Page 392 assuming the AA-3412-A was going to be used, -when in actuality, that AA Radius Rod listed in the S/B never truly went into production and that design was scrubbed. The reason it would have been issued an 'A' suffix is because Engineering did make a few prototypes for testing purposes and so they had to be able to track it. This however, does not mean this prototype ever went into production.
Again, I will research this by reading thru the EIs whenever the Benson Library re-opens however, like I have stated here before, the S/B is not without errors. Just because it is printed in the S/B does not mean we should assume it is 'gospel' until it has been researched thoroughly.
